CIT v. Kabul Chawla

380 ITR 573High Court2016#3 most cited

What is CIT v. Kabul Chawla authority for?

In a search assessment under Section 153A, additions can only be made for completed or non-abated assessment years if incriminating material relevant to those years is found during the search, although notice under Section 153A(1) is mandatorily issued for six assessment years preceding the search.

3,235

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 367,854 Indian tax judgments — from 2015 to 2026.

Also referred to as

CIT v. Kabul Chawla · Kabul Chawla · section 153A · section 132 · incriminating material · search assessment · non-abated years · scope of assessment · additions · undisclosed income

Also reported as

61 Taxmann.com 412234 Taxmann 300281 CTR 45

Sections most often in play

Section 153ASection 132Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 153CSection 132ASection 143(2)
Read the full judgment

Issues it is cited on

section 158bcstatement under section 132(4)section 132asection 158bblock periodsection 132(1)section 153a(1)section 158section 153bsearch assessmentpanchnamaincriminating material

Judgments citing CIT v. Kabul Chawla

Daawat Foods Ltd., New Delhi vs. ACIT, New Delhi

In the result, assessee’s appeal in ITA

ITA 4158/DEL/2013[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi19 Jan 2021AY 2008-09

Bench: Sh. Anil Chaturvedi & Sh. Kuldip Singh(Through Video Conferencing) & Daawat Foods Ltd., Vs. Acit, Unit No.134, 1St Floor, Central Circle – 19, Rectangle I, New Delhi Saket District Centre, Saket, New Delhi-110 017 Pan No. Aaccd 3698 N (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By Shri Ajay Vohra, Sr. Adv. Shri Rohit Jain, Adv. Ms. Deepashree Rao, C.A. Shri Vibhu Gupta, C.A. Revenue By Ms. Nidhi Srivastava, Cit-D.R Date Of Hearing: 17/12/2020 Date Of Pronouncement: 19/01/2021 Order Per Anil Chaturvedi, Am: Both The Appeals Filed By The Assessee Are Directed Against The Order Dated 28.03.2013 Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax (A)-Xxxiii, New Delhi Relating To Assessment Years 2007-08 & 2008-09. Ita Nos.4157 & 4158/Del/2013 Daawat Foods Ltd Vs. Acit A.Y. 2007-08 & 2008-09 2 2. The Relevant Facts As Culled From The Material On Records Are As Under:

Section 132Section 142Section 143(1)Section 153A

…income of the assessee for that assessment year will have to be computed by the AO as a fresh exercise. We find that Hon’ble ITA Nos.4157 & 4158/Del/2013 Daawat Foods Ltd vs. ACIT A.Y. 2007-08 & 2008-09 10 Delhi High Court in the case of Kabul Chawla [2016] 380 ITR 573 (Del) has observed as under: “Summary of the legal position 37. On a conspectus of section 153A(1) of the Act, read with the provisos thereto, and in the light of the law explained in the aforementioned decisions, the legal position that emerges is as under : (i) Once a search takes place under section 132 of the Act, notice under section 153A(1…

Daawat Foods Ltd., New Delhi vs. ACIT, New Delhi

In the result, assessee’s appeal in ITA

ITA 4157/DEL/2013[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi19 Jan 2021AY 2007-08

Bench: Sh. Anil Chaturvedi & Sh. Kuldip Singh(Through Video Conferencing) & Daawat Foods Ltd., Vs. Acit, Unit No.134, 1St Floor, Central Circle – 19, Rectangle I, New Delhi Saket District Centre, Saket, New Delhi-110 017 Pan No. Aaccd 3698 N (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By Shri Ajay Vohra, Sr. Adv. Shri Rohit Jain, Adv. Ms. Deepashree Rao, C.A. Shri Vibhu Gupta, C.A. Revenue By Ms. Nidhi Srivastava, Cit-D.R Date Of Hearing: 17/12/2020 Date Of Pronouncement: 19/01/2021 Order Per Anil Chaturvedi, Am: Both The Appeals Filed By The Assessee Are Directed Against The Order Dated 28.03.2013 Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax (A)-Xxxiii, New Delhi Relating To Assessment Years 2007-08 & 2008-09. Ita Nos.4157 & 4158/Del/2013 Daawat Foods Ltd Vs. Acit A.Y. 2007-08 & 2008-09 2 2. The Relevant Facts As Culled From The Material On Records Are As Under:

Section 132Section 142Section 143(1)Section 153A

…income of the assessee for that assessment year will have to be computed by the AO as a fresh exercise. We find that Hon’ble ITA Nos.4157 & 4158/Del/2013 Daawat Foods Ltd vs. ACIT A.Y. 2007-08 & 2008-09 10 Delhi High Court in the case of Kabul Chawla [2016] 380 ITR 573 (Del) has observed as under: “Summary of the legal position 37. On a conspectus of section 153A(1) of the Act, read with the provisos thereto, and in the light of the law explained in the aforementioned decisions, the legal position that emerges is as under : (i) Once a search takes place under section 132 of the Act, notice under section 153A(1…

Goldies Trading Co. Ltd., Faridabad vs. DCIT, Central Circle- II, Faridabad

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 7420/DEL/2017[2008-09]Status: PendingITAT Delhi14 Jan 2021AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri B.R.R. Kumar

For Appellant: Shri Somil Agrawal, AdvFor Respondent: Ms. Sunita Singh, CIT-DR
Section 153ASection 153CSection 37(1)

…ed material. Here in this case, the Assessing Officer has made disallowance of freight charge which is not based on any incriminating material or document, and therefore, in view of the decision of Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of CIT vs. Kabul Chawla, 380 ITR 573 (Del.), no addition could have been made, the finding of the ld. CIT(A) in paragraph 4.3 disregarded the judgment of Hon’ble Jurisdictional High Court in the case of Kabula Chawla (supra) is not justified. 3. On the other hand, ld. counsel has strongly relied upon the order of the Assessing Officer and Ld. CIT(A). 4. On perusal of the impugned…

DCIT, Central Circle- 32, New Delhi vs. Appolo Traexim Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi

In the result, the solitary ground of appeal and the appeal of the ld AO is dismissed

ITA 7863/DEL/2017[2004-05]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi04 Jan 2021AY 2004-05

Bench: Shri Bhavnesh Saini & Shri Prashant Maharishi(Through Video Conferencing) Dcit, Vs. Appolo Traexim Pvt. Ltd., Central Circle-32, A-20, Naraina Industrial New Delhi Area, Phase-1, Naraina, New Delhi Pan: Aaeca0010D (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri Prakash Dubey, Sr. DR
Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 271(1)Section 271(1)(c)Section 68

…appeal before the ld CIT(A) as per order dated 02.07.2013 this addition was confirmed. 4. However, on filing of the appeal before the coordinate bench the above addition was deleted based on the decision of the Hon‟ble Delhi High Court in CIT Vs. Kabul Chawla 380 ITR 573 and Pr. CIT Vs. Meeta Gutguttia 152 DTR 153. 5. However, as per order dated 28.03.2005 based on the order of the ld CIT(A) confirming the above addition, the ld AO levied a penalty of Rs. 53,81,250/- u/s 271(1)(c) for the concealment of income. 6. The assessee challenged the same before the ld CIT(A), who passed an order on 24.10.2017 deleting th…

Dy CIT CC 2 (2), Mumbai vs. Smt. Kalpana Mukesh Ruia, Mumbai

The appeal stands dismissed

ITA 6962/MUM/2019[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai31 Dec 2020AY 2012-13
Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 68

…THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “H” Bench, Mumbai Shri Shamim Yahya (AM) & Shri Ramlal Negi (JM) I.T.A. No. 6519/Mum/2019 (Assessment Year 2012-13) I.T.A. No. 6520/Mum/2019 (Assessment Year 2013-14) I.T.A. No. 6521/Mum/2019 (Assessment Year 2014-15) Smt. Kalpana Mukesh Ruia DCIT, CC-2(2) 1102/1103, Express Zone Vs. Old CGO Building A Wing, Patel Vatika Annexe, 8th Floor Off Western Express M.K. Road Highway, Malad-East Mumbai-400 020. Mumbai-400 097. PAN : ASRPR4293B (Appellant) (Respondent) I.T.A. No. 6960/Mum/2019 (Assessment Year 2014-15) Sneha Rajesh Ruia DCIT, CC-2(2) 2202 A, Lakshchandi Vs. Old CGO B…

Kalpna Mukesh Ruia, Mumbai vs. DCIT CC 2 (2), Mumbai

The appeal stands dismissed

ITA 6519/MUM/2019[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai31 Dec 2020AY 2012-13
Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 68

…THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “H” Bench, Mumbai Shri Shamim Yahya (AM) & Shri Ramlal Negi (JM) I.T.A. No. 6519/Mum/2019 (Assessment Year 2012-13) I.T.A. No. 6520/Mum/2019 (Assessment Year 2013-14) I.T.A. No. 6521/Mum/2019 (Assessment Year 2014-15) Smt. Kalpana Mukesh Ruia DCIT, CC-2(2) 1102/1103, Express Zone Vs. Old CGO Building A Wing, Patel Vatika Annexe, 8th Floor Off Western Express M.K. Road Highway, Malad-East Mumbai-400 020. Mumbai-400 097. PAN : ASRPR4293B (Appellant) (Respondent) I.T.A. No. 6960/Mum/2019 (Assessment Year 2014-15) Sneha Rajesh Ruia DCIT, CC-2(2) 2202 A, Lakshchandi Vs. Old CGO B…

The Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-1, Gutnur vs. Arunachalam Manickvel, Gutnur

In the result, appeal of the revenue for the A

ITA 207/VIZ/2020[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam23 Dec 2020AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri D.S. Sunder Singhआयकर अपीलसं./I.T.A.No.202/Viz/2020 To 207/Viz/2020 (ननधधारण वर्ा/Assessment Year:2011-12 To 2016-17) Dy.Commissioner Of Vs. Sri Arunachalam Manickavel Income Tax Prop : M/S Bharathi Soap Works Central Circle-1 11/25, Amaravathi Road Guntur Gorantla, Guntur [Pan :Acfpa3107K] (अपीलार्थी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent) अपीलधथी की ओर से/ Appellant By : Shri D.K.Sonowal, Cit Dr प्रत्यधथी की ओर से / Respondent By : Shri M.V.Prasad, Ar. सुनवधई की तधरीख / Date Of Hearing : 25.11.2020 घोर्णध की तधरीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 23.12.2020 आदेश /O R D E R Per Bench :

For Appellant: Shri D.K.Sonowal, CIT DRFor Respondent: Shri M.V.Prasad, AR
Section 132Section 132(4)

…ments u/s 153A with reference to used of incriminating material : i) CIT Vs Anil Kumar Bhatia [2013] 352 ITR 493 J) CIT Vs. Chetan Des Lachman Das[2012] 25 taxmann.com 227 k) CIT Vs. Lanch constructions [2016] 237 Taxman 728 (kar) l) CIT V Kabul Chawla [2015J 380 ITR 573 On going through the appellant’s submissions, case laws cited above and the other documents filed, I am of the opinion that the addition made in the unabated assessment for the assessment year 2011-12 did not arise from any incriminating material found in the course of search and hence the same is held to be not in 45 I.T.A. No.202/Viz/2020 to 20…

The Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-1, Gutnur vs. Arunachalam Manickvel, Gutnur

In the result, appeal of the revenue for the A

ITA 206/VIZ/2020[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam23 Dec 2020AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri D.S. Sunder Singhआयकर अपीलसं./I.T.A.No.202/Viz/2020 To 207/Viz/2020 (ननधधारण वर्ा/Assessment Year:2011-12 To 2016-17) Dy.Commissioner Of Vs. Sri Arunachalam Manickavel Income Tax Prop : M/S Bharathi Soap Works Central Circle-1 11/25, Amaravathi Road Guntur Gorantla, Guntur [Pan :Acfpa3107K] (अपीलार्थी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent) अपीलधथी की ओर से/ Appellant By : Shri D.K.Sonowal, Cit Dr प्रत्यधथी की ओर से / Respondent By : Shri M.V.Prasad, Ar. सुनवधई की तधरीख / Date Of Hearing : 25.11.2020 घोर्णध की तधरीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 23.12.2020 आदेश /O R D E R Per Bench :

For Appellant: Shri D.K.Sonowal, CIT DRFor Respondent: Shri M.V.Prasad, AR
Section 132Section 132(4)

…ments u/s 153A with reference to used of incriminating material : i) CIT Vs Anil Kumar Bhatia [2013] 352 ITR 493 J) CIT Vs. Chetan Des Lachman Das[2012] 25 taxmann.com 227 k) CIT Vs. Lanch constructions [2016] 237 Taxman 728 (kar) l) CIT V Kabul Chawla [2015J 380 ITR 573 On going through the appellant’s submissions, case laws cited above and the other documents filed, I am of the opinion that the addition made in the unabated assessment for the assessment year 2011-12 did not arise from any incriminating material found in the course of search and hence the same is held to be not in 45 I.T.A. No.202/Viz/2020 to 20…

The Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-1, Guntur vs. Arunachalam Manickvel, Gutnur

In the result, appeal of the revenue for the A

ITA 205/VIZ/2020[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam23 Dec 2020AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri D.S. Sunder Singhआयकर अपीलसं./I.T.A.No.202/Viz/2020 To 207/Viz/2020 (ननधधारण वर्ा/Assessment Year:2011-12 To 2016-17) Dy.Commissioner Of Vs. Sri Arunachalam Manickavel Income Tax Prop : M/S Bharathi Soap Works Central Circle-1 11/25, Amaravathi Road Guntur Gorantla, Guntur [Pan :Acfpa3107K] (अपीलार्थी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent) अपीलधथी की ओर से/ Appellant By : Shri D.K.Sonowal, Cit Dr प्रत्यधथी की ओर से / Respondent By : Shri M.V.Prasad, Ar. सुनवधई की तधरीख / Date Of Hearing : 25.11.2020 घोर्णध की तधरीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 23.12.2020 आदेश /O R D E R Per Bench :

For Appellant: Shri D.K.Sonowal, CIT DRFor Respondent: Shri M.V.Prasad, AR
Section 132Section 132(4)

…ments u/s 153A with reference to used of incriminating material : i) CIT Vs Anil Kumar Bhatia [2013] 352 ITR 493 J) CIT Vs. Chetan Des Lachman Das[2012] 25 taxmann.com 227 k) CIT Vs. Lanch constructions [2016] 237 Taxman 728 (kar) l) CIT V Kabul Chawla [2015J 380 ITR 573 On going through the appellant’s submissions, case laws cited above and the other documents filed, I am of the opinion that the addition made in the unabated assessment for the assessment year 2011-12 did not arise from any incriminating material found in the course of search and hence the same is held to be not in 45 I.T.A. No.202/Viz/2020 to 20…

The Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-1, Gutnur vs. Arunachalam Manickvel, Gutnur

In the result, appeal of the revenue for the A

ITA 204/VIZ/2020[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam23 Dec 2020AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri D.S. Sunder Singhआयकर अपीलसं./I.T.A.No.202/Viz/2020 To 207/Viz/2020 (ननधधारण वर्ा/Assessment Year:2011-12 To 2016-17) Dy.Commissioner Of Vs. Sri Arunachalam Manickavel Income Tax Prop : M/S Bharathi Soap Works Central Circle-1 11/25, Amaravathi Road Guntur Gorantla, Guntur [Pan :Acfpa3107K] (अपीलार्थी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent) अपीलधथी की ओर से/ Appellant By : Shri D.K.Sonowal, Cit Dr प्रत्यधथी की ओर से / Respondent By : Shri M.V.Prasad, Ar. सुनवधई की तधरीख / Date Of Hearing : 25.11.2020 घोर्णध की तधरीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 23.12.2020 आदेश /O R D E R Per Bench :

For Appellant: Shri D.K.Sonowal, CIT DRFor Respondent: Shri M.V.Prasad, AR
Section 132Section 132(4)

…ments u/s 153A with reference to used of incriminating material : i) CIT Vs Anil Kumar Bhatia [2013] 352 ITR 493 J) CIT Vs. Chetan Des Lachman Das[2012] 25 taxmann.com 227 k) CIT Vs. Lanch constructions [2016] 237 Taxman 728 (kar) l) CIT V Kabul Chawla [2015J 380 ITR 573 On going through the appellant’s submissions, case laws cited above and the other documents filed, I am of the opinion that the addition made in the unabated assessment for the assessment year 2011-12 did not arise from any incriminating material found in the course of search and hence the same is held to be not in 45 I.T.A. No.202/Viz/2020 to 20…

The Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-1, Gutnur vs. Arunachalam Manickvel, Gutnur

In the result, appeal of the revenue for the A

ITA 203/VIZ/2020[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam23 Dec 2020AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri D.S. Sunder Singhआयकर अपीलसं./I.T.A.No.202/Viz/2020 To 207/Viz/2020 (ननधधारण वर्ा/Assessment Year:2011-12 To 2016-17) Dy.Commissioner Of Vs. Sri Arunachalam Manickavel Income Tax Prop : M/S Bharathi Soap Works Central Circle-1 11/25, Amaravathi Road Guntur Gorantla, Guntur [Pan :Acfpa3107K] (अपीलार्थी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent) अपीलधथी की ओर से/ Appellant By : Shri D.K.Sonowal, Cit Dr प्रत्यधथी की ओर से / Respondent By : Shri M.V.Prasad, Ar. सुनवधई की तधरीख / Date Of Hearing : 25.11.2020 घोर्णध की तधरीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 23.12.2020 आदेश /O R D E R Per Bench :

For Appellant: Shri D.K.Sonowal, CIT DRFor Respondent: Shri M.V.Prasad, AR
Section 132Section 132(4)

…ments u/s 153A with reference to used of incriminating material : i) CIT Vs Anil Kumar Bhatia [2013] 352 ITR 493 J) CIT Vs. Chetan Des Lachman Das[2012] 25 taxmann.com 227 k) CIT Vs. Lanch constructions [2016] 237 Taxman 728 (kar) l) CIT V Kabul Chawla [2015J 380 ITR 573 On going through the appellant’s submissions, case laws cited above and the other documents filed, I am of the opinion that the addition made in the unabated assessment for the assessment year 2011-12 did not arise from any incriminating material found in the course of search and hence the same is held to be not in 45 I.T.A. No.202/Viz/2020 to 20…

The Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-1, Guntur vs. Arunachalam Manickvel, Gutnur

In the result, appeal of the revenue for the A

ITA 202/VIZ/2020[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam23 Dec 2020AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri D.S. Sunder Singhआयकर अपीलसं./I.T.A.No.202/Viz/2020 To 207/Viz/2020 (ननधधारण वर्ा/Assessment Year:2011-12 To 2016-17) Dy.Commissioner Of Vs. Sri Arunachalam Manickavel Income Tax Prop : M/S Bharathi Soap Works Central Circle-1 11/25, Amaravathi Road Guntur Gorantla, Guntur [Pan :Acfpa3107K] (अपीलार्थी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent) अपीलधथी की ओर से/ Appellant By : Shri D.K.Sonowal, Cit Dr प्रत्यधथी की ओर से / Respondent By : Shri M.V.Prasad, Ar. सुनवधई की तधरीख / Date Of Hearing : 25.11.2020 घोर्णध की तधरीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 23.12.2020 आदेश /O R D E R Per Bench :

For Appellant: Shri D.K.Sonowal, CIT DRFor Respondent: Shri M.V.Prasad, AR
Section 132Section 132(4)

…ments u/s 153A with reference to used of incriminating material : i) CIT Vs Anil Kumar Bhatia [2013] 352 ITR 493 J) CIT Vs. Chetan Des Lachman Das[2012] 25 taxmann.com 227 k) CIT Vs. Lanch constructions [2016] 237 Taxman 728 (kar) l) CIT V Kabul Chawla [2015J 380 ITR 573 On going through the appellant’s submissions, case laws cited above and the other documents filed, I am of the opinion that the addition made in the unabated assessment for the assessment year 2011-12 did not arise from any incriminating material found in the course of search and hence the same is held to be not in 45 I.T.A. No.202/Viz/2020 to 20…

M/S. Sir Pratap Heritage Hotels Pvt. Ltd., Madhya Pradesh vs. ACIT, Central Circle-1, Jodhpur

The appeal stands allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 494/JODH/2017[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Jodhpur21 Dec 2020AY 2014-15

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Sandeep Gosain, Jm & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am (Hearing Through Video Conferencing Mode) आयकरअपील सं./ I.T.A. Nos.488 To 494/Jodh/2017 ("नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Years: 2008-09 To 2014-15) Sir Pratap Heritage Hotels Pvt.Ltd. Acit– Central Circle-1 बनाम/ 1, Amarkantak Road Jodhpur Dhanpuri, Shahdol Rajasthan Vs. Madhya Pradesh-484 114. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Aajcs-4923-L (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent) :

For Appellant: Ms. Raksha Birla (CA) & ShriFor Respondent: Shri K.C. Badhok- Ld. CIT- DR
Section 143(2)Section 153A

…td. (2015 374 ITR 645) as well in Gurinder Singh Bawa (2016 386 ITR 418) which has held that in the absence of any incriminating material, the unabated assessments could not be disturbed. Similar is the view of Hon’ble Delhi High Court in CIT V/s Kabul Chawla 61 Taxmann.com 412 which has summed up legal position as follows: - "Summary of the legal position: 37. On a conspectus of Section 153A(1) of the Act, read with the provisos thereto, and in the light of the law explained in the aforementioned decisions, the legal position that emerges is as under : i. Once a search takes place under Section 132 of the Act, n…

M/S. Sir Pratap Heritage Hotels Pvt. Ltd., Madhya Pradesh vs. ACIT, Central Circle-1, Jodhpur

The appeal stands allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 488/JODH/2017[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Jodhpur21 Dec 2020AY 2008-09

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Sandeep Gosain, Jm & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am (Hearing Through Video Conferencing Mode) आयकरअपील सं./ I.T.A. Nos.488 To 494/Jodh/2017 ("नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Years: 2008-09 To 2014-15) Sir Pratap Heritage Hotels Pvt.Ltd. Acit– Central Circle-1 बनाम/ 1, Amarkantak Road Jodhpur Dhanpuri, Shahdol Rajasthan Vs. Madhya Pradesh-484 114. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Aajcs-4923-L (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent) :

For Appellant: Ms. Raksha Birla (CA) & ShriFor Respondent: Shri K.C. Badhok- Ld. CIT- DR
Section 143(2)Section 153A

…td. (2015 374 ITR 645) as well in Gurinder Singh Bawa (2016 386 ITR 418) which has held that in the absence of any incriminating material, the unabated assessments could not be disturbed. Similar is the view of Hon’ble Delhi High Court in CIT V/s Kabul Chawla 61 Taxmann.com 412 which has summed up legal position as follows: - "Summary of the legal position: 37. On a conspectus of Section 153A(1) of the Act, read with the provisos thereto, and in the light of the law explained in the aforementioned decisions, the legal position that emerges is as under : i. Once a search takes place under Section 132 of the Act, n…

Purulia Metal Casting Pvt. Ltd., Kolkata vs. D.C.I.T, Circle-4(1), Kolkata

Appeal is dismissed

ITA 1217/KOL/2019[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata15 Dec 2020AY 2011-12

Bench: Hon’Bleshrij.S Reddy, Am & Hon’Bleshri S.S. Godara, Jm I.T. A No.1217/Kol/2019A.Y 2011-12 M/S. Purulia Metal Casting Vs. Dcit, C.C-4(1), Kolkata Pvt. Ltd. Pan: Aadcp4189P (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri MirajD.Shah, Ld.ARFor Respondent: Shri ImokabaJamir, CIT/DR
Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 68

…ed 12-03-2015 apparent that no assessment was pending. Case law PCIT vs. M/s Salasar Stock Producing Ltd. GA No. 929 of 2016 ITA No. 264 of 2016 dated 24.08.2016, CIT vs. Veeraprashee Marketing Ltd. (2016) 73 taxmann.com 149 (Cal), CIT vs. Kabul Chawla (2016) 380 ITR 573 (Del) and CIT vs. Sinhgad Education Society (2017) 397 ITR, 344 (SC) that assessment u/s. 153A of the Act involving unabated proceedings has to be based on incriminating material found or seized during the course of the search in question. We go by the above said hon’ble jurisdictional high court at the cost of non- jurisdictional high courts (su…

The Pr. Commissioner of Income Tax-Central-3 vs. Allied Perfumers Pvt. Ltd

Appeals are dismissed

ITA/391/2019HC Delhi14 Dec 2020

Bench: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MANMOHAN,HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJEEV NARULA

Section 132Section 143(1)Section 153Section 153ASection 153CSection 260ASection 68

…sessee, and therefore re-visiting the prior settled issues was not permissible. The ITAT allowed the cross objections of the assessee and quashed the AO following the decision of this Court in the case of Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. Kabul Chawla, (2016) 380 ITR 573 (Del.). The Revenue has thus preferred the present appeals, assailing the aforesaid impugned order of the ITAT. 10. Mr. Abhishek Maratha, learned senior standing counsel appearing on behalf of the Revenue contends that the ITAT has failed to take note that in the instant cases, incriminating documents belonging to the assessee were found…

The Pr. Commissioner of Income Tax-Central-3 vs. Allied Perfumers Pvt. Ltd

Appeals are dismissed

ITA/380/2019HC Delhi14 Dec 2020

Bench: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MANMOHAN,HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJEEV NARULA

Section 132Section 143(1)Section 153Section 153ASection 153CSection 260ASection 68

…sessee, and therefore re-visiting the prior settled issues was not permissible. The ITAT allowed the cross objections of the assessee and quashed the AO following the decision of this Court in the case of Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. Kabul Chawla, (2016) 380 ITR 573 (Del.). The Revenue has thus preferred the present appeals, assailing the aforesaid impugned order of the ITAT. 10. Mr. Abhishek Maratha, learned senior standing counsel appearing on behalf of the Revenue contends that the ITAT has failed to take note that in the instant cases, incriminating documents belonging to the assessee were found…

DCIT - CC- 6 (3), Mumbai vs. Shri Manoj M. Desai, Mumbai

In the result the revenues appeal stands dismissed

ITA 6301/MUM/2018[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai07 Dec 2020AY 2011-12

Bench: Making Addition, Despite The Fact That - A) The Assessee Has Never Made Any Request For Cross Examination During Assessment Proceeding & Thus Question Of Providing Of Opportunity Of Cross Examination Does Not Arise. B) Ld. Cit (A) Has Herself Mentioned That Shri Praveen Mishra Retracted His Statement Thereby Making Him Assessee'S Witness & Hence No Opportunity Of His Cross Examination Was Required Rather It Was Assessee'S Onus To Produce Him Before The Ao For Cross Examination.

Section 132Section 133ASection 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 153Section 153ASection 69

…THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “D” Bench, Mumbai Shri Shamim Yahya (AM) & Shri Ramlal Negi (JM) I.T.A. No. 6301/Mum/2018 (Assessment Year 2011-12) DCIT, Central Circle-6(3) Shri Manoj M. Desai Vs. Room No. 1926, 19th 204, Sahyadri Floor, Air India Building Neelkanth Vally Nariman Point Complex, 7th Road Mumbai-400 021. Rajawadi Mumbai-400 077. PAN : ABBPD2066K (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee by Shri Nishit Gandhi Department by Shri Deepakant Prasad Date of Hearing 29.10.2020 Date of Pronouncement 07.12.2020 O R D E R Per Shamim Yahya (AM) :- This appeal by the Revenue is directed against order of Lea…

Mirah Dekor Pvt. Ltd., Mumbai vs. DCIT - CC - 2(1), Mumbai

In the result we set aside the orders of authorities below and delete the addition

ITA 5318/MUM/2018[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai01 Dec 2020AY 2010-11
Section 132Section 133(6)Section 133ASection 139(1)Section 143(3)Section 153A

…sence of any incriminating documents found in the course of search. Addition made by A.O. is unjustified and unsustainable. Reliance on: i) ITAT order in ITA No.2618/Mum/2018 in the case of Gammon Infrastructure Projects Ltd. vide order dated 06/02/2020 ii) 380 ITR 573 (Del.) CIT vs. Kabul Chawla iii) 374 ITR 645 (Bom.) CIT vs. Continental Warehouse Corporation iv) 397 ITR 82 (Del.) Pr. CIT vs. Best Infrastructure (India) Pvt. Ltd. H) Addition made relying on statement of third party without affording opportunity to cross examine. Addition unsustainable. Reliance on Hon'ble Apex Court order in Civil Appeal No…

ACIT, Central Circle-15, New Delhi vs. Sunstar Infra Developers Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi

In the result, all the Cross Objections filed by the assessees are allowed and all the appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 816/DEL/2018[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi27 Nov 2020AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Ms Suchitra Kamble

Section 132Section 143(3)Section 154

…addition made of Rs. 6,46,20,000/- is without jurisdiction since it is not based on any material found as a result of search on the appellant, as have been also held by the judgments of Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of CIT vs. Kabul Chawla reported in 380 ITR 573 and Pr. CIT vs. Meeta Gutgutia reported in 395 ITR 526. 2. That since approval obtained u/s 153D of the Act was a mechanical and, invalid approval having been granted without due application of mind to CO Nos.73 to 76, 86 & 87, 79 to 82, 88, 90, 71, 72 & 70, 84 &85/Del/2018 the facts of the assessee company, order of assessment made u/s 153 A/143…